:00:00. > :00:16.Welcome, whether you're watching or listening,
:00:17. > :00:18.to our audience here, and to our panel.
:00:19. > :00:20.Conservative Communities Secretary, promoted to the Cabinet
:00:21. > :00:26.Labour's Caroline Flint, who chose to return to the backbenches
:00:27. > :00:29.when Jeremy Corbyn won the leadership.
:00:30. > :00:31.The Liberal Democrat former Business Secretary Vince Cable,
:00:32. > :00:36.Parliamentary sketch writer and theatre critic
:00:37. > :00:57.And Britain's best known classicist, Professor Mary Beard.
:00:58. > :01:03.If you want to text or tweet our hashtag is BBCQT,
:01:04. > :01:10.Text comments to 83981, and press the Red Button to see
:01:11. > :01:26.Our first question from Polly Cassidy, please. Should Donald Trump
:01:27. > :01:32.be banned from the UK? It is on everybody's lips, this question.
:01:33. > :01:37.Quentin Letts. Certainly not. I want him here because I want to look at
:01:38. > :01:43.that haircut. If I liked a flame near it, will it melts, or is it
:01:44. > :01:49.alive underneath there? But there is as serious issue here, which is one
:01:50. > :01:53.of inciting violence, perhaps. So you have to take this question
:01:54. > :01:56.seriously. There has been a big petition that a lot of people have
:01:57. > :01:59.signed saying we should never let him into this country on account of
:02:00. > :02:04.what he said about not allowing Muslims into the United States. I
:02:05. > :02:07.think we are overreacting, dignifying him too much. In some
:02:08. > :02:12.ways what he said is not controversial because everybody in
:02:13. > :02:17.Britain disagrees with it. But should one ban people on account of
:02:18. > :02:21.not liking what they say? I have a suspicion that is not a particularly
:02:22. > :02:27.British reaction. You say everybody but according to YouGov, a court of
:02:28. > :02:32.the country agrees with him. Well, I don't know, but I am wary in this
:02:33. > :02:36.country at least that there seems to be a competition... A quarter of
:02:37. > :02:40.this country. I am not sure I believe that. It is not practical to
:02:41. > :02:44.ban people on account of their religion. There is a competition
:02:45. > :02:48.going on to say, I hate Donald Trump more than anybody else. There is a
:02:49. > :02:52.strange competition going on to say, we are the most vehement about this.
:02:53. > :02:58.Let's give it a break and not get so het up about what is plainly
:02:59. > :03:03.unreasonable. Let's hear from the audience. I do find it quite strange
:03:04. > :03:07.that we ban certain people from coming into the country. We banned
:03:08. > :03:11.Mike Tyson at one point but then we let in the Chinese premier, the
:03:12. > :03:16.premiere of a country with numerous human rights abuses, coming to the
:03:17. > :03:21.country with no issues at all. What about Donald Trump? I think he is as
:03:22. > :03:28.bad as anyone else, but he should be allowed in. On the gangway. I don't
:03:29. > :03:30.think this should be taken lightly. This man could potentially become
:03:31. > :03:36.the leader of one of the biggest countries in the world. So what he
:03:37. > :03:41.says yields a lot of power. He said Muslims should have ID cards. What
:03:42. > :03:47.is he going to say next? Should we wear armbands to be identified? This
:03:48. > :03:51.is ridiculous. Mary Beard. I would quite like to get him here so we
:03:52. > :03:57.could explain to him why he is wrong. Leaving him in America to say
:03:58. > :04:01.all of this stuff is fine, but actually, he would be much better
:04:02. > :04:08.off on a panel of Question Time actually being challenged about his
:04:09. > :04:13.views. And in the end, rather than banning him, I was really more
:04:14. > :04:19.worried by the idea that he was, until yesterday, still in his role
:04:20. > :04:24.as business ambassador for Scotland. Happily, Nicola Sturgeon has got rid
:04:25. > :04:27.of him. She said something like, he is no longer fit for the job. I
:04:28. > :04:31.thought, when was he fit for the job? This isn't his first offence.
:04:32. > :04:42.APPLAUSE Who was the person up there? I just
:04:43. > :04:46.want to say that I agree with Quentin Letts. I think it is
:04:47. > :04:51.contradictory, their reaction to the Donald Trump petition. During the
:04:52. > :04:56.Charlie Hebdo attacks, we were all backing freedom of speech, and we
:04:57. > :05:00.were supporting the magazine that was openly insulting Muslims. And
:05:01. > :05:04.now we are having this big battle against the fact that he should not
:05:05. > :05:08.have freedom of speech for insulting Muslims. It is quite a contrary
:05:09. > :05:14.position. Social media always have battles of who looks best, but as
:05:15. > :05:20.you can see, in these situations they have disagreed on freedom of
:05:21. > :05:24.speech. Social media are not to be relied on for consistency? Yes,
:05:25. > :05:31.consistency, they disagree. You can say that again! No one has an
:05:32. > :05:35.automatic right to come to this country, it is for the Home
:05:36. > :05:40.Secretary to decide. The question is, is he mostly an offensive idiot,
:05:41. > :05:45.or is he an insight of hatred? Looking at some of the other things
:05:46. > :05:50.he has had to say, about women, per example, he qualifies as the former.
:05:51. > :05:55.But like Mary, I would like him to come here. If I had him with me, I
:05:56. > :06:00.would take him around to meet some of my Muslim constituents and
:06:01. > :06:05.friends, and introduce him to some of the pillars of our community. I
:06:06. > :06:09.would like to introduce him to our police officers have them tell him
:06:10. > :06:13.that they do not walk around with guns very often because they do not
:06:14. > :06:17.need to. I would like to introduce him to some British people who could
:06:18. > :06:21.perhaps teach him a bit of manners and politeness, and I think it would
:06:22. > :06:27.do him a power of good to spend a bit of time in England. If we can do
:06:28. > :06:33.that, we should let him in. And I would make him read a great deal of
:06:34. > :06:37.Katie Hopkins, who he thinks is a respected British columnist. If he
:06:38. > :06:41.wins the Republican nomination and the presidency, as a Cabinet
:06:42. > :06:46.minister you will call him an offensive idiot? I think he is. If
:06:47. > :06:51.you look at what he has said about Muslims and about women,
:06:52. > :06:56.fortunately, I expect the good sense of the American electorate will give
:06:57. > :07:02.him the result he deserves. You, in the front. I don't agree that he
:07:03. > :07:06.should be banned. The petition was started before he made these recent
:07:07. > :07:12.allegations, these recent comments, and I do feel that he has upset
:07:13. > :07:17.everyone from Mexicans to women to disabled people. And it has only
:07:18. > :07:25.gained momentum since he made the remarks about Muslims. I heard this
:07:26. > :07:28.morning on Radio 5, the radio -- the lady from Aberdeen who initiated the
:07:29. > :07:34.petition. It was going on before that. Obviously, the way things are
:07:35. > :07:41.going within the world at the moment, it is a big talking point.
:07:42. > :07:46.There are a couple of petitions. One is to try and get a debate in the
:07:47. > :07:51.House of Commons. This is the one I am talking about. Theresa May has
:07:52. > :07:57.banned hundreds of people for concerns about how they might
:07:58. > :08:00.inflame violence in our streets and under hate speech laws that we have
:08:01. > :08:04.in this country. To be honest, I would not mind if she added another
:08:05. > :08:09.one to her list, and that would be Donald Trump. I think he is an
:08:10. > :08:13.odious man who cannot open his mouth without offending someone. You made
:08:14. > :08:18.the point about women, disabled people, people from Mexico. I do
:08:19. > :08:22.think this is more than him being unreasonable. He has condemned an
:08:23. > :08:27.entire religion by saying nobody who is Muslim should be allowed into the
:08:28. > :08:30.United States of America. I think that is racist, and I would like to
:08:31. > :08:34.say we don't want him within 1000 miles of the UK, we don't support
:08:35. > :08:39.him and we will not allow someone who has such power to voice those
:08:40. > :08:40.views come here and spread that here, too.
:08:41. > :08:50.APPLAUSE Polly Cassidy, who asked the
:08:51. > :08:54.question, what is your view? I don't think he should be banned, but I
:08:55. > :08:58.just wish he would go away as well. I just find it really depressing
:08:59. > :09:01.that he is being treated as entertainment when it is actually
:09:02. > :09:06.quite a serious matter, and the media seems to be feeding into that
:09:07. > :09:10.by treating him as a laughing stock. George W Bush was a laughing stock
:09:11. > :09:15.and he got in several times, so... APPLAUSE
:09:16. > :09:21.Does anyone agree with Donald Trump in what he said about banning
:09:22. > :09:25.Muslims? I think we should be more concerned about Muslim extremists
:09:26. > :09:29.being allowed to preach their terrorist views on the streets of
:09:30. > :09:32.London and whatnot, you know. But that's not what he was saying, he
:09:33. > :09:38.was saying we should ban all Muslims from the United States. But we have
:09:39. > :09:43.allowed clerics like Abu Hamza to preach on the streets of London. We
:09:44. > :09:47.allowed it to carry on. So you think he is wrong in how he has put it but
:09:48. > :09:51.what he is getting at is right? I would not agree with him but I do
:09:52. > :09:57.not think we should be banning him from the UK. Vince Cable. I would
:09:58. > :10:02.not ban him, but for different reasons. He is appalling, ignorant,
:10:03. > :10:07.ugly prejudice and all those things. But you have to confront these
:10:08. > :10:10.arguments. When this programme at its finest hour was when Nick
:10:11. > :10:18.Griffin of the BNP was in his finery. He was rising up the public
:10:19. > :10:22.opinion polls. Many people said keep him off Question Time, but he was
:10:23. > :10:26.allowed on and shown to be shallow, ignorant and prejudiced, and it
:10:27. > :10:30.helped turn the people against him. One has to deal with these people
:10:31. > :10:33.head-on. In terms of the comment that the gentleman the back maid,
:10:34. > :10:37.who was moderately sympathetic to Donald Trump, in a way, the
:10:38. > :10:41.Government has created its own problem. Theresa May and the Prime
:10:42. > :10:45.Minister have brought in this concept of the nonviolent extremist.
:10:46. > :10:49.One of the battles I fought at the end of the government, and I think
:10:50. > :10:52.Greg was on my side on this, was that they were trying to stop
:10:53. > :10:57.universities and other institutions having these people speak. I took a
:10:58. > :11:01.very strong view, which Quentin Letts echoed a few minutes ago, that
:11:02. > :11:05.we may detest people in their views but in this country you give people
:11:06. > :11:10.the right to say them and you answer them back. So the whole idea of
:11:11. > :11:15.banning people who are not violent but are extreme in their views is a
:11:16. > :11:21.very dangerous thing to do. Do you agree? Is he right when he thinks
:11:22. > :11:25.you were with him? What you need to recognise is that there are people
:11:26. > :11:29.who may not commit violence themselves, but they do in sight it,
:11:30. > :11:35.and they lead people to, especially in positions of influence, and we
:11:36. > :11:41.have brought in laws to address that. One of the things that you can
:11:42. > :11:46.do with that is to insist that if you have, for example, a speaker
:11:47. > :11:48.with extreme views, to make sure they are challenged, so that you can
:11:49. > :11:55.have the other side of the argument put. But if people have a record of
:11:56. > :11:58.inciting violence and encouraging people to commit violence, then I
:11:59. > :12:07.think they should be excluded from our country. Steve Horler. My farm
:12:08. > :12:12.in Bath floods every year and it is getting more extreme. What actions
:12:13. > :12:15.should the Government be taking to protect ourselves and the
:12:16. > :12:22.environment? Have you been flooded recently? Not like the north-west,
:12:23. > :12:31.but we flood every year. Caroline Flint. I must make a note to ask
:12:32. > :12:37.Donald Trump on the programme. Perhaps he will come, if you will
:12:38. > :12:40.let him in! There is a lot of discussion at the moment about
:12:41. > :12:45.whether or not the storms we have seen, again, in our country are
:12:46. > :12:48.linked to climate change. It is hard to pinpoint one weather events to
:12:49. > :12:52.climate change, but the fact that we are having more frequent storms and
:12:53. > :12:56.extreme weather, I think we can very much say that that is part of what
:12:57. > :13:00.is happening, in terms of climate change around the world. Part of
:13:01. > :13:05.what we have in this country is a recognition, and I am proud of the
:13:06. > :13:09.fact that when we passed the climate change in 2008, there was cause
:13:10. > :13:13.party support for that, with only five MPs voting against it. That was
:13:14. > :13:17.as recognising as a country that we need to try and reduce the emissions
:13:18. > :13:20.that contribute to climate change, and also to be a leader, like we
:13:21. > :13:25.hopefully are in the negotiations in Paris. But the truth is, the problem
:13:26. > :13:30.with these weather conditions is here now. And for your farm, and
:13:31. > :13:35.others around the country, who keep being told the risk is based on one
:13:36. > :13:38.in 100 years, when people have experienced two flood situations in
:13:39. > :13:44.six years, is not good enough. We did see in the last government, in
:13:45. > :13:48.the early part of the last government, money on flood defences
:13:49. > :13:53.being cut. Last year, ?115 million was cut from it. We need to better
:13:54. > :13:56.recognise this as a national-security issue because it
:13:57. > :14:01.puts businesses out of work, families out of their homes, and it
:14:02. > :14:03.does cause, in some cases, not just destruction to property but the loss
:14:04. > :14:11.of lives. APPLAUSE
:14:12. > :14:17.The man at the back? Would you agree it is time to redirect the foreign
:14:18. > :14:22.aid budget towards the flood victims? Away from flood victims in
:14:23. > :14:27.other parts of the world, to this country? Away from foreign aid and
:14:28. > :14:33.redirect it, Charity starts at home. I think you need to do both. You
:14:34. > :14:37.can't do both, you redirect it or you don't. We should be consistent
:14:38. > :14:41.with our commitments to help people who are victims of flooding in other
:14:42. > :14:47.countries, and we certainly should do that here as well. I was in
:14:48. > :14:50.Cumbria yesterday, and can I just take this opportunity, David, to
:14:51. > :14:54.express my admiration for the work that is being done there. When you
:14:55. > :14:57.go and see it for yourself and see people who have been working flat
:14:58. > :15:03.out, emergency services, the councils, the volunteers, it is an
:15:04. > :15:09.inspiring site to see. One of the things you do notice when you go
:15:10. > :15:12.round there, I went to Appleby, one of the towns that has been
:15:13. > :15:15.particularly badly affected. The vicar took me into her church. She
:15:16. > :15:22.pointed at the level that the water had reached in the last weekend, and
:15:23. > :15:28.the previous level, and there was a huge difference. It was a record
:15:29. > :15:33.rainfall. Four or five feet? It was waist height in the church and
:15:34. > :15:37.clearly completely ruined. Taking his point, the government spends
:15:38. > :15:41.half in this country what it spends on the international climate fund.
:15:42. > :15:45.Why is that? That is what he was saying. We need to put the flood
:15:46. > :15:51.defences that are needed. I will come to that. The defences that were
:15:52. > :15:54.put in place had been put in place over recent years. They were what
:15:55. > :15:59.was calculated would defend these towns and villages across the
:16:00. > :16:03.country but the water flooded and beyond it, so Steve's question is
:16:04. > :16:09.whether we should review the modelling and to see whether that is
:16:10. > :16:11.adequate, and I think that we should do that. The Environment Secretary
:16:12. > :16:16.as the Prime Minister has said we need to look at why these more
:16:17. > :16:23.frequent occurrences of these catastrophic floods should be
:16:24. > :16:27.happening. What about diverging money from the international climate
:16:28. > :16:34.fund? To the UK? I think we need to do both. In the past I visited
:16:35. > :16:38.angler desk, and -- Bangladesh, and if you look at the vulnerability of
:16:39. > :16:43.a place like Bangladesh, the same kind of climatic events that affect
:16:44. > :16:47.the rest of the world, in terms of saving people from destitution, that
:16:48. > :16:51.is an appropriate use of our foreign aid, not least because, and we see
:16:52. > :16:56.what happens when you have turbulence in places such as Syria,
:16:57. > :17:01.you have populations displaced, and this affects the whole of the world,
:17:02. > :17:05.so I think that for our own stability and security you need to
:17:06. > :17:10.protect people from these catastrophic keep events. It's what
:17:11. > :17:16.we should do to our fellow human beings anyway, but actually there is
:17:17. > :17:19.a case for our own stability. Quentin Letts? The question from
:17:20. > :17:24.Steve is what can be done to protect the population, I think, and there
:17:25. > :17:27.are various things. We can stop building new houses on flood plains,
:17:28. > :17:30.that would be a good thing. And sometimes these flood defences,
:17:31. > :17:36.although they sound like great ideas, sometimes they can have the
:17:37. > :17:39.effect of forcing the water down the other areas which in the past would
:17:40. > :17:43.not have been flooded. So well-meaning schemes can sometimes
:17:44. > :17:47.cause problems further downstream. But as far as protecting, we can
:17:48. > :17:51.make sure that our emergency services have everything they need,
:17:52. > :17:57.but you can't expect politicians to solve everything, or to stop the
:17:58. > :18:00.flood waters. I am wary on the BBC of talking about climate change,
:18:01. > :18:05.because I get into trouble about this recently and people seem to
:18:06. > :18:10.think... Because you gave one side of the argument. I am regarded as
:18:11. > :18:15.some sort of denial. I'm not, I don't quite believe everything I am
:18:16. > :18:19.told by Kaymer change, I believe boffins, I don't believe lobbyists
:18:20. > :18:22.I'm wary of blaming one particular flood on climate change. I don't
:18:23. > :18:29.know the answer on that. But I would be wary of expecting the politicians
:18:30. > :18:32.in Paris to be able to solve these problems. Sometimes these are
:18:33. > :18:38.natural events, acts of God, if you like. But the enormous universe may
:18:39. > :18:45.not be affected necessarily by man-made emissions, I don't know.
:18:46. > :18:53.You, sir? Extreme flooding with climate change increase of about one
:18:54. > :19:02.Celsius, predictions of two three Celsius, why is the government
:19:03. > :19:05.cutting the support for renewables and the likelihood...
:19:06. > :19:12.APPLAUSE In the likelihood that these extreme
:19:13. > :19:17.weather events won't be every four or five years, they will be every
:19:18. > :19:21.year? Why is it cutting the means to prevent it getting worse in the
:19:22. > :19:27.future? Is that a strong argument for you, Vince Cable? Non-others are
:19:28. > :19:31.climate change scientists. We can't attribute particular events to
:19:32. > :19:33.climate change. Nonetheless the chief scientist of the Met Office
:19:34. > :19:38.established a very clear link between what is happening on a
:19:39. > :19:44.global level, you know, we have the 15 hottest years we've ever recorded
:19:45. > :19:48.out of the last 16, the link between the warming of the world increasing
:19:49. > :19:53.turbulence and extreme events. I think that is now reasonably well
:19:54. > :19:56.established scientifically. I think your follow-up comments, why aren't
:19:57. > :20:00.we moving more towards renewables, there has been over the last few
:20:01. > :20:03.years a move in that direction, but the government over the last few
:20:04. > :20:08.months has done some very retrograde things. It is unjust is cutting the
:20:09. > :20:11.subsidies to solar power, for example, they now charged
:20:12. > :20:17.value-added tax. It's actually penalising one of the emerging new
:20:18. > :20:20.technologies. Why do you think they are doing that? I think the
:20:21. > :20:25.Chancellor of the Exchequer is not terribly committed to this agenda.
:20:26. > :20:28.To take another example, I helped set up the green investment bank,
:20:29. > :20:35.which has now mobilised about ?10 billion of investment in new
:20:36. > :20:38.renewable technologies, invoice disposable energy efficiency and
:20:39. > :20:41.it's being shoved wholly into the private sector so it can no longer
:20:42. > :20:47.perform a proper environmental function. This government is backing
:20:48. > :20:50.away from an environmental agenda and all commitments to global
:20:51. > :20:53.warming at a time we need it more than ever before. Vince, that is not
:20:54. > :20:59.the case. APPLAUSE
:21:00. > :21:02.If you look at the climate conference that is taking place in
:21:03. > :21:07.Paris as we speak, there was a report to the conference that rated
:21:08. > :21:12.and ranked all of the countries and their contribution. The UK was
:21:13. > :21:16.second only to Denmark in the progress that we are making. We are
:21:17. > :21:21.on track to meet our emissions reductions targets. Most of the
:21:22. > :21:25.people aren't. We are on track to have 30% of our electricity coming
:21:26. > :21:31.from renewables when I looked this morning it was 21% already, we will
:21:32. > :21:34.get to 30% by 2020. We have got the green investment bank. Its very
:21:35. > :21:41.successful. It's something we introduced and we will continue. I'm
:21:42. > :21:45.proud we are going into the talks in Paris as leaders, not as followers.
:21:46. > :21:50.Last time at Copenhagen, and I was at Copenhagen as the opposition
:21:51. > :21:55.spokesman, in 2009, we were on the back foot because we didn't have,
:21:56. > :21:58.and Vince will know this, an energy policy that could stand up to
:21:59. > :22:01.scrutiny. We have turned that around in the last five years and we are
:22:02. > :22:07.being recognised for that internationally. Briefly. The 2008
:22:08. > :22:11.climate change act set out our targets for emissions and that was
:22:12. > :22:14.the Labour government. A huge amount of the renewable energy that has
:22:15. > :22:19.been developed, the business plans and investment came in at the tail
:22:20. > :22:23.end of the Labour government and they have been built and yours. We
:22:24. > :22:27.are going backwards, not forwards. Businesses on solar and wind are
:22:28. > :22:31.going out of business because you are moving the goalposts. You were
:22:32. > :22:35.always good at targets, but the last Labour government while passing a
:22:36. > :22:42.law to set the targets tried to get through... I want to hear from...
:22:43. > :22:47.It's a partisan squabble. Its party politics, ludicrous. You have heard
:22:48. > :22:52.what has been said. We need to stop building on the flood plain. My
:22:53. > :22:57.local MP wants to build a car park on my land under to increase the
:22:58. > :23:02.amount of cards on the roads, CO2 emissions. They will float away.
:23:03. > :23:05.There will be nowhere for the water to go. How can Greg Clark as
:23:06. > :23:11.planning Minister give planning permission to something like that?
:23:12. > :23:15.We can't go into planning. Mary Beard. You have been a fantastic
:23:16. > :23:23.example of how the political debate always goes into these really big
:23:24. > :23:27.edgy things about climate change and renewables and emissions, and
:23:28. > :23:30.clearly that's important. But what tends to get overlooked is some
:23:31. > :23:33.other things you have just mentioned, that Quentin mentioned,
:23:34. > :23:37.it's about basic issues about building on flood plains, but also
:23:38. > :23:43.about how you manage watercourses, how you planned, how you see how the
:23:44. > :23:51.water comes off the high ground into the low ground, and that is joined
:23:52. > :23:55.up practical local thinking, and it's not very sexy but it is
:23:56. > :23:58.actually one of the best first-line defences against what we are seeing
:23:59. > :24:02.happening and what happened here. OK.
:24:03. > :24:06.APPLAUSE We will move on, because I want to
:24:07. > :24:09.get through a number of questions. I will take the woman at the top
:24:10. > :24:15.right-hand side, and then the next question. Quickly, if you would. Mr
:24:16. > :24:18.Clark, you said we are on target, we will meet our targets, but
:24:19. > :24:23.regardless of whether we are or not, surely we should be pushing further.
:24:24. > :24:27.You said Denmark are ahead of us, we should be trying to beat them, we
:24:28. > :24:27.should always be pushing forward. APPLAUSE
:24:28. > :24:31.Thank you for that. Next week we're in Slough,
:24:32. > :24:33.then we're off over Christmas, Details on the screen
:24:34. > :24:50.now for how to apply. A question from Justin Roberts. Is
:24:51. > :24:54.David Cameron's negotiation with the European Council for real, or will
:24:55. > :25:00.the British public ultimately be sold a pup? Is it for real, the
:25:01. > :25:03.negotiation, or will we be sold a pup? The Prime Minister was quoted
:25:04. > :25:06.as saying voters will think push Europe away, it's bringing me
:25:07. > :25:12.problems and all the rest of it. It seems to come to not to a halt, but
:25:13. > :25:16.the slowdown. Vince Cable, what's your view of what is going on at the
:25:17. > :25:20.moment and how successful is David Cameron being with his
:25:21. > :25:22.renegotiation? We don't know whether he is successful with the
:25:23. > :25:26.renegotiation until they have happened. This is a problem of his
:25:27. > :25:31.own creation. He didn't need to have the referendum, but wanted to have
:25:32. > :25:35.it because of internal Conservative Party tensions. He dreamt of these
:25:36. > :25:38.four conditions, three of which are very difficult to evaluate whether
:25:39. > :25:43.you have succeeded or not, motherhood and apple pie, we are all
:25:44. > :25:49.in favour of it. The one that the public are concerned about has to be
:25:50. > :25:56.dealt with, is our public fears about immigration, and the test he
:25:57. > :26:01.set, which is the limit migrants' access from Europe to in work
:26:02. > :26:05.benefits, that is the bit that is now running into trouble, because in
:26:06. > :26:10.order to operate it you need to discriminate between different
:26:11. > :26:14.people within Europe. That goes totally contrary to the basic
:26:15. > :26:18.principles of the single market, and remember, that was Mrs Thatcher who
:26:19. > :26:24.negotiated that for us. He is now falling back on another mechanism,
:26:25. > :26:27.that if we had serious problems with migration the government could
:26:28. > :26:31.introduce an emergency stop, but that would have to happen with the
:26:32. > :26:34.permission of the European Commission, which means that we
:26:35. > :26:39.wouldn't have it under control. So he's created a problem which he
:26:40. > :26:42.cannot now solve, and I suspect what will happen is the people in the
:26:43. > :26:48.Conservative Party, who have set in these hurdles to jump, will say
:26:49. > :26:51.sorry, Guy, you have disappointed us, and they will not have achieved
:26:52. > :26:54.the objective. What he should be doing is what I think he believes
:26:55. > :26:58.deep down and certainly George Osborne as well and making the case
:26:59. > :27:02.for as being in the European Union. It's a difficult case to make at the
:27:03. > :27:06.moment because of the problems the Union are having but the livelihood
:27:07. > :27:11.of millions of people is now tied up with our trade and connections with
:27:12. > :27:14.Europe. We have to fight the nationalism which is becoming
:27:15. > :27:18.increasingly common and which the European Union has protected us
:27:19. > :27:22.from. There is very basic arguments which he should now be making, not
:27:23. > :27:27.engaging in this rather futile and I think ultimately pointless
:27:28. > :27:30.diversionary exercise. Justin Roberts, who asked the question, do
:27:31. > :27:35.you agree with what Vince Cable has said? Do you think there should be
:27:36. > :27:40.or would be... We will trade with Europe even if we are not part of
:27:41. > :27:43.Europe. We trade with the United States and we're not a state of the
:27:44. > :27:49.union. All those millions of people employed in trade with Europe will
:27:50. > :27:54.still probably employed. What's your view? I think we should pull the
:27:55. > :27:58.ejector seat lever and get out as soon as possible. OK.
:27:59. > :28:02.APPLAUSE The woman there. I want to say on
:28:03. > :28:07.the subject of what Vince said about leaving the European Union, I think
:28:08. > :28:11.the government needs to do something quickly about the monopoly of
:28:12. > :28:13.Euroscepticism in the tabloid press, because it's completely ridiculous.
:28:14. > :28:20.The entire tabloid press is against Europe. The UK is the most
:28:21. > :28:23.uneducated country about the EU and its incredibly dangerous, the only
:28:24. > :28:28.information we get about the EU with false and from newspapers that have
:28:29. > :28:29.an agenda to make sales and not keep us in the best position in this
:28:30. > :28:34.country. APPLAUSE
:28:35. > :28:37.OK, who was shouting out and complaining here? Who said no,
:28:38. > :28:46.rubbish? None of you will confess to it now! You weren't? Not me. What's
:28:47. > :28:49.your view? I would like to know if David Cameron fails with these
:28:50. > :28:54.negotiations, which is looking quite possible in terms of getting the
:28:55. > :28:59.migrant benefits. Macro the four-year thing, yes. Whether he
:29:00. > :29:04.will campaign to leave the EU? I want to know if that's possible.
:29:05. > :29:07.Quentin Letts, what is the Daily Mail's view? It's
:29:08. > :29:14.uncharacteristically inaccurate comment because I think the Daily
:29:15. > :29:19.Mail is quite pro-Europe. You links EU to migration. Will you stop that
:29:20. > :29:24.arsed tabloid newspapers running what they want to run. Six of the
:29:25. > :29:27.main newspapers in this country were owned by News of the World guy, I
:29:28. > :29:35.can't remember his name, it's undemocratic. The BBC is quite...
:29:36. > :29:38.The BBC has broadcasting laws and manages to be a democratic entity
:29:39. > :29:42.and its incredibly ridiculous the printing press in this country has
:29:43. > :29:48.the ability to manipulate a country. I think the Son has predicted the
:29:49. > :29:49.election victory of the last six governments, that's coincidence, we
:29:50. > :30:01.need to do something about this. I'd like to pick up that point. I
:30:02. > :30:06.don't know about Cameron, when he says anything I don't know who he's
:30:07. > :30:11.talking to. Is he trying to satisfy his backbenchers, or is he trying to
:30:12. > :30:16.worry me, I don't know. But what I do know, and we have seen it already
:30:17. > :30:21.tonight, is that the pro-Europe lobby tends, sadly, I think, always
:30:22. > :30:24.to say, just how damn awful it is going to be if we come out of Europe
:30:25. > :30:31.because we will lose all these jobs, etc. What I want to be hearing is
:30:32. > :30:36.somebody speaking a positive message about how damn good it is going to
:30:37. > :30:39.be in Europe. We have things to change but there is a pan-European
:30:40. > :30:44.project out there that we can actually be part of. And we can make
:30:45. > :30:51.a difference in the world that we can't on our own. I want to hear it
:30:52. > :30:56.for that. Not just a gloomy, terribly sad state of affairs that
:30:57. > :31:03.will happen if we leave. Turn to the Cabinet minister on your right. Can
:31:04. > :31:07.you satisfy Mary Beard? The key thing is that David Cameron is not
:31:08. > :31:14.appealing to me or anyone else on this panel. He is not appealing to
:31:15. > :31:20.you! The choice in the referendum will be for the British people to
:31:21. > :31:23.decide. That will be the choice the British people have. Occasionally,
:31:24. > :31:28.when I have been to Europe and have been talking to... You are in
:31:29. > :31:28.Europe, I have to tell you. You are in Europe.
:31:29. > :31:36.APPLAUSE Talking to ministers from other
:31:37. > :31:41.countries, they have sometimes expressed concerns as to should we
:31:42. > :31:45.be having this to go Sheshan. What I have said is this. In all of our
:31:46. > :31:48.democracies across Europe, every four or five years you ask the
:31:49. > :31:55.question, could things be better than they are now? That seems a
:31:56. > :31:58.reasonable question. If it is a reasonable question for every
:31:59. > :32:02.democracy, why not ask that of the European Union? That is what David
:32:03. > :32:09.Cameron is doing with his the go Sheshan and that is a reasonable
:32:10. > :32:17.approach to take. That is dreadfully naive. The whole question has huge
:32:18. > :32:22.indications for the UK. There are in mind we have seen the SNP in
:32:23. > :32:33.Scotland threatening a second referendum. I am not against
:32:34. > :32:37.reforming the European Union. Most institutions are worth looking at to
:32:38. > :32:43.be reformed from time to time. Like the Labour Party? I have been part
:32:44. > :32:47.of many reforms in the Labour Party and I'm glad we did reform. On the
:32:48. > :32:50.European Union, I am not against reform but this whole thing with
:32:51. > :32:54.David Cameron is about trying to find a way to come up with something
:32:55. > :32:58.so he can go to the Tory Eurosceptics and say, we have got
:32:59. > :33:04.this, let's back being in the European Union. Let me finish. I
:33:05. > :33:07.agree with Mary. Whatever the outcome of what David Cameron
:33:08. > :33:11.achieves or does not achieve, I will be voting to stay in the European
:33:12. > :33:15.Union because I think it is good for our country, good for jobs and
:33:16. > :33:19.investment, good for our security, the fact that we can work with
:33:20. > :33:24.police forces across the European Union to secure getting criminals
:33:25. > :33:28.back here to face charges and send criminals to their countries as
:33:29. > :33:31.well, it is good for the environment, because the European
:33:32. > :33:36.Union, at the talks in Paris, as a bloc, can demonstrate what they can
:33:37. > :33:40.achieve as the European Union but also influencing the rest of the
:33:41. > :33:45.world. I think that is good. To say to Justin, about coming out, there
:33:46. > :33:49.are consequences. Norway is not a member of the European Union but it
:33:50. > :33:53.wants to trade, but it has to pay in order to do that, and it has to
:33:54. > :33:58.abide by every single rule and regulation, but it doesn't have a
:33:59. > :34:00.say. That would be the issue that would face asked if we weren't in
:34:01. > :34:05.the European Union. APPLAUSE
:34:06. > :34:15.As a politician, are you sympathetic, you just said David
:34:16. > :34:18.Cameron was doing it to satisfy the sceptical backbenchers. Are you
:34:19. > :34:22.sympathetic to him having to do that to keep his party together, or do
:34:23. > :34:28.you think he should ignore them? I don't know how the Labour Party goes
:34:29. > :34:31.about it. Isn't it reasonable? Ever since he has been leading the
:34:32. > :34:37.Conservative Party he had a problem with Eurosceptics. He can't kick
:34:38. > :34:40.them out. He has set up a false premise that somehow he can go
:34:41. > :34:44.around and have all these meetings and sit with other EU Heads of State
:34:45. > :34:47.meeting come up with something. It has taken five years at least for
:34:48. > :34:51.him to come up with a list of demands. My view is that it is a
:34:52. > :34:57.false premise, and we should celebrate what an advantage we have
:34:58. > :35:00.being part of the European Union. David Cameron has this knee jerk
:35:01. > :35:08.optimism, bouncing off to Europe like Tigger. And then he bounces
:35:09. > :35:12.into some peevish Polish person or a ruminating Romanian, and they seek
:35:13. > :35:15.-- say the opposite of what he once and then there is a schizophrenic
:35:16. > :35:19.press conference where they will say, we will not give you anything
:35:20. > :35:23.you want and David Cameron says, that is marvellous and he will give
:35:24. > :35:29.me everything I want. There is a strange disconnect there. My feeling
:35:30. > :35:35.about this, and I have not always been a steaming euro-sceptic, but I
:35:36. > :35:39.think I am starting to simmer. I get the impression that the British
:35:40. > :35:44.people are, as David Cameron said today, they are slightly getting fed
:35:45. > :35:48.up with Europe. That is because the optimism, as Mary was saying, has
:35:49. > :35:53.gone out of the European Union and people are now thinking, and I think
:35:54. > :35:58.they may be right, that the sunny uplands may be on the leaves side.
:35:59. > :36:06.My feeling is, let's cut the Gordian knot and get out. Up at the back.
:36:07. > :36:14.Perhaps the woman in White. I am not a woman. Don't worry, I am not
:36:15. > :36:21.offended. I can see you in close-up now. Given the crisis that has
:36:22. > :36:26.broken out in Europe, why is David Cameron is so keen to try to shove
:36:27. > :36:32.these negotiations through? Surely, given what is happening in France...
:36:33. > :36:37.What would you have him do? He has to have the referendum. But we don't
:36:38. > :36:44.even know when yet, do we? Why does it need to happen now? What would
:36:45. > :36:47.you like him to do? Not have a referendum? He can have a
:36:48. > :36:55.referendum, but if he wants to have this renegotiation, it does not seem
:36:56. > :37:01.genuine at this point. And the woman there, if you are a woman. I am a
:37:02. > :37:04.woman. One of the main reasons for creating the European Union in the
:37:05. > :37:11.first place was to prevent a world war happening again. We have got
:37:12. > :37:15.horrendous atrocities from Isil, the potential of nuclear warfare on the
:37:16. > :37:19.horizon. Surely it is better to renegotiate as part of a bigger
:37:20. > :37:22.body, to renegotiate these things and use the technology to pass
:37:23. > :37:24.between the countries to solve potential problems for our futures.
:37:25. > :37:34.APPLAUSE Let's move on to a question from
:37:35. > :37:42.Phillip Cameron, please. Do the panel think Jeremy Corbyn has been
:37:43. > :37:46.fairly treated by the media? We were talking about the media over the
:37:47. > :37:52.European issue a moment ago. Do you think Corbyn gets fair treatment in
:37:53. > :37:58.the press? I think the media have shown him in action. I was in the
:37:59. > :38:02.House of Commons for the vote on Syria. And he made a speech at the
:38:03. > :38:08.beginning of it, which was quoted extensively on the news. And it was,
:38:09. > :38:13.I thought, a poor argument for the case. I think when people have
:38:14. > :38:19.looked at the policy positions that he has taken, very extreme, a real
:38:20. > :38:25.danger, it seems to me, to the country, that has been reported on.
:38:26. > :38:31.When he has said, for example, when asked after the Paris attacks, he
:38:32. > :38:36.was asked whether it would be appropriate for an officer to shoot
:38:37. > :38:39.to kill a terrorist in those circumstances, he had to hesitate
:38:40. > :38:43.before being able to answer in the affirmative. These things have come
:38:44. > :38:46.across, and they need to come across because this man is the leader of
:38:47. > :38:50.Her Majesty 's opposition, who wants to be our Prime Minister. I think
:38:51. > :38:53.this is being communicated to people.
:38:54. > :39:00.APPLAUSE What is your view? The fact that he
:39:01. > :39:01.hesitates before he answers shows he is considering all options first.
:39:02. > :39:15.APPLAUSE Mary Beard. I think he is having a
:39:16. > :39:25.pretty rough time and I think he is behaving with a considerable degree
:39:26. > :39:29.of dignity, given that. You look through the papers and you think,
:39:30. > :39:33.just for example on the problem about whether he will go to the stop
:39:34. > :39:39.the War Coalition party, the poor man is going to be hung if he does
:39:40. > :39:45.and hung if he doesn't. Who is going to hang him if he doesn't? Is he
:39:46. > :39:51.going to sing national anthem? If the poor guy sings it, he gets, look
:39:52. > :39:56.at this, he's a Republican, what a hypocrite. If he doesn't sing it
:39:57. > :39:59.they say, look, and he hasn't even got the decency to respect our boys
:40:00. > :40:05.and sing the national anthem like he should. I think that quite a lot,
:40:06. > :40:10.not everything, quite a lot of what Corbyn says I find I more or less
:40:11. > :40:13.agree with, and I rather like his different style of leadership. I
:40:14. > :40:19.like hearing arguments, not sound bites. And if the Labour Party is
:40:20. > :40:23.going through at the moment a rough time, and I'm sure it is rough to be
:40:24. > :40:28.in their, I think it might actually all be to the good. And he might be
:40:29. > :40:31.changing the party in a way that would make it easier for people like
:40:32. > :40:37.me to vote for them. APPLAUSE
:40:38. > :40:43.I said at the beginning, Caroline, that you left the front bench for
:40:44. > :40:46.the backbenchers when he was elected. What is your view about the
:40:47. > :40:52.way he is defected, and your view about the stop the war dinner
:40:53. > :40:56.tomorrow? Let me start with the question about the media first. I
:40:57. > :41:03.think some of the stuff has been pretty trivialised. Some of the
:41:04. > :41:06.early stuff about watching him at the commemorative service and the
:41:07. > :41:10.national anthem and what have you, even at the Cenotaph, comments made
:41:11. > :41:18.as well which I think were pretty unfair. That sort of coverage is not
:41:19. > :41:22.exclusive to Jeremy. Lots of politicians and Labour leaders have
:41:23. > :41:28.had to deal with that. I have been in the party 36 years so I have seen
:41:29. > :41:33.a lot of that over the years. I do think it is a big step up of a job
:41:34. > :41:37.from being a backbencher, where you can do your own thing, to being the
:41:38. > :41:43.leader of the Labour Party. One of the things that Jeremy has,
:41:44. > :41:46.undoubtedly, he won an election with a huge mandate. But also part of the
:41:47. > :41:51.reason why he won that election was that he had a certain authenticity
:41:52. > :41:56.that came across during the process, that people liked over and above the
:41:57. > :41:59.other leadership candidates. I don't think he should be packaged or
:42:00. > :42:03.modelled to get rid of that, but what he does need is to make sure
:42:04. > :42:08.the team around him recognise that he needs support to be able to do
:42:09. > :42:13.his job. In some cases when it has come to the media, they haven't
:42:14. > :42:17.helped him. But it is a big job and he has four years to grow into that
:42:18. > :42:21.job, just like when David Cameron started as leader of the Tories. Why
:42:22. > :42:26.did you leave the front bench then and make clear you did not approve
:42:27. > :42:31.or agree with him? I left the front bench because I spent five years in
:42:32. > :42:36.the Shadow Cabinet, before that I was a minister and I have the right
:42:37. > :42:42.to say I want to take some time out. It was not they comment on his
:42:43. > :42:47.policies? It is about me having some freedom to... So you support
:42:48. > :42:52.everything he goes for? No, I don't. But as an MP of 18 years I wanted
:42:53. > :42:54.time to talk about some of the issues, unfettered by being in the
:42:55. > :42:55.Shadow Cabinet, and I have the right to choose to do that.
:42:56. > :43:04.APPLAUSE I would like to come back to what
:43:05. > :43:12.Greg Clarke said about the vote for bombing Syria. The Labour Party had
:43:13. > :43:15.a free vote. It was in the press for days, will he or will he not allow
:43:16. > :43:23.them to vote with their hearts on such an important issue. Did your
:43:24. > :43:27.leader of that? No. Listen, I think there is, on matters of war and
:43:28. > :43:32.peace like that, I think you should look to a party to have a view.
:43:33. > :43:36.Hilary Benn gave a brilliant speech, but to have the leader of the party
:43:37. > :43:41.saying one thing, the Shadow Foreign Secretary saying something else,
:43:42. > :43:44.that may be consistent with having a free vote, but this is the
:43:45. > :43:49.alternative government. What would they do if they were in government?
:43:50. > :43:50.We need to know that. What you are supposed to represent the people.
:43:51. > :43:59.APPLAUSE By having a free vote, you could
:44:00. > :44:02.speak with your heart, speak for the poor souls who are going to die as a
:44:03. > :44:08.result of it. Your party did not offer a free vote and that is so, so
:44:09. > :44:15.wrong. Vincent cable, do you think a free vote was the right way to go? I
:44:16. > :44:22.am sure it was. You don't think an opposition should have a consistent
:44:23. > :44:25.view bastion Mark there are issues of constancy. Ireland when my party
:44:26. > :44:32.came out against the Iraq war we discussed it at great length. -- I
:44:33. > :44:36.remember. There is no obvious party ideology behind a choice of that
:44:37. > :44:40.kind. If I had still been there, I would have voted for air strikes,
:44:41. > :44:43.but to have had an open debate is commendable. If I could just go to
:44:44. > :44:50.the issue of Jeremy Corbyn, the brutal politics is that he is rather
:44:51. > :44:55.disastrous for the Labour Party's prospects. The fact that we don't
:44:56. > :44:58.now have an effective opposition. My parties in the wilderness and the
:44:59. > :45:03.Labour Party is talking to itself, and that is bad. The one good thing
:45:04. > :45:07.about Jeremy Corbyn, and I think it is a positive thing that he or
:45:08. > :45:12.someone else has to build, he is making an effort to engage with
:45:13. > :45:16.millions of young people who have poor job prospects. We are producing
:45:17. > :45:19.a generation of people who are highly educated but with little
:45:20. > :45:23.prospect of good employment and secure employment, and who cannot
:45:24. > :45:28.get into the housing market. The chances of buying a house until your
:45:29. > :45:34.late 30s are very remote, or having rented accommodation that is the
:45:35. > :45:38.affordable. We are producing, potentially, a highly alienated
:45:39. > :45:42.younger generation. And he is making an attempt to engage them in
:45:43. > :45:47.Democratic politics. That is commendable, and I think whoever
:45:48. > :45:49.else is leading the opposition, from whatever party or combination of
:45:50. > :46:01.parties, as to tap into that agenda. Who hasn't spoken yet? You there.
:46:02. > :46:06.Caroline, you and the Labour Party need to get behind Jeremy Corbyn. He
:46:07. > :46:10.is a genuine human being. You said that it was terrible that he
:46:11. > :46:13.thought, he paused for a moment before thinking about killing
:46:14. > :46:18.someone, that is a genuine human being. He cares about people, he
:46:19. > :46:23.represents the people and has always works for us. We need to get behind
:46:24. > :46:31.him and Caroline, you do too. You, in the road below. I think that he
:46:32. > :46:34.is wonderful insomuch as he's generating so much political
:46:35. > :46:40.discussion that wasn't happening before amongst so many people.
:46:41. > :46:43.Quentin Letts? It's all very well saying Jeremy Corbyn is a genuine
:46:44. > :46:50.human being, of course he is, but he's also a genuine human being who
:46:51. > :46:55.during the 1980s was pretty probe the IRA, and I think that's a
:46:56. > :47:03.problem. That's unfair. I don't think that is wrong, with respect.
:47:04. > :47:10.APPLAUSE I personally am worried that he is
:47:11. > :47:13.not more critical of people who seem to be our enemies, and I think
:47:14. > :47:18.that's a problem for the Labour Party in a general election. It is
:47:19. > :47:22.Bill Artur Pikk -- it is bizarre to be a journalist at Westminster at
:47:23. > :47:27.the moment and Labour MPs almost run up to you to off Jeremy Corbyn. For
:47:28. > :47:32.once, we are not making things up when we report that is division in
:47:33. > :47:37.the Labour Parliamentary party and when Hilary Benn gave that striking
:47:38. > :47:41.speech in the House of Commons, he turned to his own party, he was
:47:42. > :47:44.addressing it to his own party and at the end of it there was
:47:45. > :47:49.tremendous applause, I may have seen you clapping him vehemently, and
:47:50. > :47:52.that applause, I think I'm right in interpreting, was anti-Corbyn. This
:47:53. > :48:00.is a Parliamentary party at least, I think very much it was, actually, it
:48:01. > :48:06.was pro-Hilary 's speech, which was anti-corporate. There seems to be a
:48:07. > :48:10.lot of. Macro is this audience entirely supporting Jeremy Corbyn as
:48:11. > :48:16.leader of the Labour Party? APPLAUSE
:48:17. > :48:23.The Conservatives up my new may be as applauding just as loudly as
:48:24. > :48:30.Labour members. You hear? The server you heard from the young lady at the
:48:31. > :48:32.back needs to be taken notice of, -- the enthusiasm. What Labour
:48:33. > :48:36.Parliamentary party seems to have forgotten is they have lost the last
:48:37. > :48:39.election and if we are ever going to win another one we need a lot of
:48:40. > :48:44.younger people voting Labour and that's what Jeremy Corbyn is
:48:45. > :48:47.bringing to the table. Very briefly, Caroline. I'm all in favour of
:48:48. > :48:53.having more young people joined the Labour Party, I joined at 17, but I
:48:54. > :48:56.have to say to you as well in the last election we lost massively
:48:57. > :49:00.amongst older voters and that the next election majority of voters are
:49:01. > :49:06.going to be over the age of 55. So we do need young people, but we have
:49:07. > :49:09.to recognise that in in 2020 we have to stop just talking to ourselves
:49:10. > :49:13.which is what we have been doing for the last six months, and start
:49:14. > :49:18.talking to the public about why they didn't support us and how we can
:49:19. > :49:21.bring their support back. Jeremy has a responsibility to make sure as our
:49:22. > :49:25.leader he reaches out beyond the Labour Party members to that group
:49:26. > :49:29.of people as well. Before we close, can I hear from any Conservative
:49:30. > :49:34.supporters in the audience who have a view? The question was if the
:49:35. > :49:41.media had treated Jeremy Corbyn unfairly, or fairly. I think the
:49:42. > :49:44.media has. I think when Jeremy Corbyn has done foolish things, the
:49:45. > :49:51.press has reported his foolish things. And really, the only people
:49:52. > :49:57.who think that Jeremy Corbyn has been treated unfairly, in an unfair
:49:58. > :50:06.way by the media, are what I call the closet communists. SCATTERED
:50:07. > :50:11.APPLAUSE . I want to take another question.
:50:12. > :50:15.This is something we have had, a question that has underlain a lot of
:50:16. > :50:18.our discussions over the last few months about the national Health
:50:19. > :50:22.Service, from Leigh-Ann Clarke blaze, Leigh-Ann Clarke. Wires and
:50:23. > :50:26.more being done by the government to support people suffering with mental
:50:27. > :50:34.health conditions in the UK -- why isn't more being done. Everyone
:50:35. > :50:37.knows the NHS is stretched financially, so the question is
:50:38. > :50:41.whether they should take money from other parts of the NHS to spend on
:50:42. > :50:48.mental health issues. Caroline Flint. We had a debate on mental
:50:49. > :50:52.health issues this week, it's a massively important area for us to
:50:53. > :50:55.understand, that if we don't spend more in this area then there will be
:50:56. > :50:59.other costs that we will have to face as well, and for too long, I
:51:00. > :51:04.was a public health minister in the last Labour government, and for a
:51:05. > :51:07.long time we have had a treatment service in hospitals, but we haven't
:51:08. > :51:09.had the sort of services in the community to prevent people becoming
:51:10. > :51:15.ill and that includes resources for mental health as well. I have three
:51:16. > :51:20.prisons in my constituency and I know that for a lot of offenders
:51:21. > :51:23.they are suffering from mental health problems, addiction problems,
:51:24. > :51:27.and problems in terms of literacy. So we really have to look, if we are
:51:28. > :51:31.going to say there needs to be parity between mental health and
:51:32. > :51:34.physical health, we have to find a way to make sure that is a reality
:51:35. > :51:38.because at the moment services are being cut back, people who need
:51:39. > :51:44.hands-on support are isolated on their own, and they cannot only be a
:51:45. > :51:48.danger to themselves but such a good -- sadly, tragically, they can be a
:51:49. > :51:52.danger to other people as well and that's not acceptable. The budget
:51:53. > :51:57.put back money that had been taken out in real terms, Vince Cable, the
:51:58. > :52:03.last budget? The problem is the lack of joined up government. We take one
:52:04. > :52:07.example, the ASA, the modern word for the dole, a very high percentage
:52:08. > :52:16.of people on the FA have mental health conditions. -- ESA. Although
:52:17. > :52:19.their conditions are treatable, particularly with talking therapies,
:52:20. > :52:23.they are not being directed into any treatment so they are out of work
:52:24. > :52:28.and their mental health conditions are getting worse. Towards the end
:52:29. > :52:32.of the Coalition Government, my boss was a kid -- key influence on this,
:52:33. > :52:35.mental health was being elevated from its traditional status as the
:52:36. > :52:43.Cinderella of the health service, and I was given a small pot of money
:52:44. > :52:48.to bring adult education for helping people with mental health, this is
:52:49. > :52:51.not just an NHS issue, it is as Caroline says about prisons, it's
:52:52. > :52:55.about unemployment benefit, it's about schools, and thinking about
:52:56. > :53:00.this problem in a joined up way, which is completely absent now. Mary
:53:01. > :53:04.Beard. The simple answer about why it's neglected is that it's much
:53:05. > :53:12.less visible to most people most of the time. There's no blood, or there
:53:13. > :53:18.is not often blood involved. I think that makes it easy to shut your eyes
:53:19. > :53:24.too. I think it is changing. I think it's changing in a way that I hope
:53:25. > :53:29.will actually require a need and demand extra investment, because as
:53:30. > :53:36.Caroline says, that investment will be repaid over and over again
:53:37. > :53:40.economic Lee, even if you just do a brutal economic calculation, never
:53:41. > :53:46.mind the cruelty and the unfairness to the individuals concerned, you
:53:47. > :53:49.come out ahead if you look after mental health. Quentin Letts.
:53:50. > :53:55.Regarding mental health, it is difficult not to feel humbled and
:53:56. > :54:00.inadequate talking about it, especially if mercifully I have no
:54:01. > :54:05.personal family experience of that. I do, however, have recent family
:54:06. > :54:09.experience of the NHS on cancer care and that has been magnificent, and
:54:10. > :54:13.the NHS, which is getting good amounts of money, long way that
:54:14. > :54:17.last, is one of the things that gives is tremendous, as the country,
:54:18. > :54:24.tremendous social peace and all I can say is I'm proud that is the
:54:25. > :54:28.case. Greg Clark. Some of the most heart-rending constituency cases
:54:29. > :54:34.that I have been working for have been when parents, often of young
:54:35. > :54:39.people, have come to my surgery at their wits' end because they can't
:54:40. > :54:42.get an appointment to have an assessment for a child or an
:54:43. > :54:46.adolescent that has got mental health difficulties, and this goes
:54:47. > :54:50.back all the time that I have been an MP. If they have broken a leg on
:54:51. > :54:53.the rugby field or something, then they would go to a Andy and they
:54:54. > :55:00.would be treated instantly, but I had cases of people where young
:55:01. > :55:04.people were being kept waiting for six months for assessment, and
:55:05. > :55:08.that's an eternity in the life of a young person. I think that is now
:55:09. > :55:13.changing. There is a much greater recognition that we must be
:55:14. > :55:16.absolutely as committed to help people promptly and effectively, if
:55:17. > :55:19.they have a mental health condition, as they've gotten physical health
:55:20. > :55:25.condition, but we still got further to go. It's a direction we must
:55:26. > :55:31.continue to go down and to have this complete parity, so there isn't the
:55:32. > :55:35.best digital stigma -- there is the stigma that has stopped people
:55:36. > :55:39.talking about it and that is changing and I'm glad it is. To talk
:55:40. > :55:42.about young people, whilst we need more money for mental health
:55:43. > :55:47.services in general, we desperately need more money for young people
:55:48. > :55:52.with mental health problems, because the damage it can cause is life
:55:53. > :55:56.changing and some people, when they don't receive the care they need, it
:55:57. > :56:02.will never be the same. Thank you very much.
:56:03. > :56:06.APPLAUSE We are going to have a guess and no
:56:07. > :56:12.on this one, the last question from Elaine Pippard, please. Should Tyson
:56:13. > :56:16.Fury competing Sports Personality of the Year? Should Tyson Fury, the
:56:17. > :56:19.boxer, be allowed to be one of the nominees for Sports Personality of
:56:20. > :56:25.the Year, or should the BBC kick him off the list? I will go round the
:56:26. > :56:29.table, you know what he said, a woman's best places in the kitchen
:56:30. > :56:31.and on her back, and talking about, sexuality and paedophilia and
:56:32. > :56:38.abortion being the work of the devil. Mary Beard, should he be
:56:39. > :56:43.there or kicked off? He's not in my dream team for a dinner party but
:56:44. > :56:44.yes, have him there vote for somebody else.
:56:45. > :56:53.APPLAUSE Greg Clark. Yes or no? You can vote
:56:54. > :56:58.for Andy Murray in what he did in winning the Davis Cup for us. Byrom
:56:59. > :57:03.Caroline Flint? Kick him off, it's about his personality and we need
:57:04. > :57:09.better ambassadors in British sport. Quentin Letts, sportsmen
:57:10. > :57:11.ambassadors? I'd definitely have him in because I want to see the
:57:12. > :57:17.punch-up between him and Clare Balding at the end. My money is on
:57:18. > :57:23.Claire, I think she would take him, in a sense. Vince Cable? I wouldn't
:57:24. > :57:26.have him on, it's called Sports Personality of the Year, not
:57:27. > :57:30.sportsperson of the year, it's about personality as well as sport and he
:57:31. > :57:34.has failed that test. OK. APPLAUSE
:57:35. > :57:36.Thank you all very much and thank you for your swift answers on that
:57:37. > :57:39.issue, but our hour is up now. We're in Slough next
:57:40. > :57:47.week with Piers Morgan With four other people, alongside
:57:48. > :57:52.politicians. Then after Christmas we're
:57:53. > :57:54.back on 14th January To join the audience
:57:55. > :57:58.for either programme - Slough or Limehouse -
:57:59. > :58:11.go to our website, or call: If you are listening on Radio 5Live,
:58:12. > :58:25.you can continue the debate I hope that's a lively programme, it
:58:26. > :58:29.usually is. My thanks to this panel and this audience, who can't take
:58:30. > :58:30.part in that discussion. From all of us here in Bath, until next
:58:31. > :58:56.Thursday, good night. What do we do with
:58:57. > :59:00.something like this? that you might have heard
:59:01. > :59:13.about me that could be true. We've got a nutjob
:59:14. > :59:16.running around London.